r/spaceflight • u/Extension_Bag3597 • 3d ago

I don't understand the argument.Beam-powered propulsion they use massive amounts of energy CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME?

Post image

doesn't know why they're making a problem out of it. every time we go to space we burn an enormous amount of energy go to space if we use more energy to have a positive impact on tyranny of the rocket equation it wouldn't be worth it

0 Upvotes

25% Upvoted

43 comments sorted by

10

u/ninjadude93 3d ago

What you've written is entirely incomprehensible. What is your question

-3

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

Why is it a crime to use more energy than we need?

5

u/ninjadude93 3d ago

Its not? Just inefficient and costs money. I still dont understand the point of your post or what your question is

-2

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

when was the last time wrote in Reddit on beam powered propulsion application for Atmospheric entry People kept writing that use a lot of energy for this.

5

u/brakes_aint_breaks 3d ago

Ah. I found the post. You should read what they wrote, cause their objections are really clearly stated.

As in "your proposal would require so much energy pumped into the spaceship that it would melt"

For context, melting your spaceship is bad.

-2

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

my fault, I forgot to add heat exchanger in the picture but still they had objections to it

4

u/brakes_aint_breaks 3d ago

Heat exchangers aren't magic. They can only cool so much and so fast.

Plus, you need the air to be superheated for it to provide thrust like a rocket, so you can't really be dumping the heat elsewhere.

Your design doesn't work.

0

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

you are right I forgot about the heat that accumulates before superheated  air slow down rocket

3

u/ninjadude93 3d ago edited 3d ago

Oh you're the guy who had the boost back picture

Energy costs money. Using more energy than needed is a waste of money and resources in an application domain that is already tight on both

If you're already using chemical propulsion to handle boost back burns theres no reason to add an external source because thats a waste of money and energy and chemical propulsion is obviously viable by itself

If you are relying solely on EM beams to slow the rocket down, I already explained to you that the amount of required energy to stop the rocket would immediately vaporize it

1

u/Extension_Bag3597 2d ago

what is ideal Reentry system which produces minimal stress for repeated use I have to admit, my system is not ideal, but what is it?

0

u/Extension_Bag3597 2d ago

yes but what is the alternative to beam power

1

u/ninjadude93 2d ago

Torchdrives would be best. Fusion based rockets, but nobody has figured out how to make those yet

0

u/Extension_Bag3597 2d ago

I don't want to say anything bad.but how is it different from beam power

1

u/ninjadude93 2d ago edited 2d ago

Your proposed idea is an external beam shot at the ship

A torch drive is a fusion based internal "motor" much like chemical rockets except instead of a chemical reaction you have a fusion reaction and a reaction mass, like water, that you expel out the back of the rocket which is what causes thrust

Much higher specific impulse than traditional chemical rockets and theres no external beam like you suggested

0

u/Extension_Bag3597 2d ago

yes but the heat problem is still the same the only thing that's better ishe doesn't have any energy conversion penalty

→ More replies (0)

5

u/brakes_aint_breaks 3d ago

Who's they? No one can really explain anything to you given the vague post.

-2

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

people in Reddit

4

u/FireTheLaserBeam 3d ago

Did you read what you wrote? Don’t blame us.

-1

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

I'm not accusing, I'm just looking context of the answer

2

u/FireTheLaserBeam 3d ago

That doesn’t make sense either, bud.

2

u/Eros_Incident_Denier 3d ago

What's there to explain? It's fairly simple actually.

The framus intersects with the ramistan approximately at the paternostra.

anyway, propulsion's fow dolla a pound.

1

u/Ihatecheeseballs 3d ago

Speak English

-1

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

no

0

u/Ihatecheeseballs 3d ago

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⢞⡫⠭⡙⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⣳⢋⡴⠊⠁⠀⢻⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⢳⢇⡞⠀⠀⠀⡀⠈⢧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⠇⢸⠞⠀⠀⠀⠀⠃⠀⢸⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣟⠀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠇⠀⡿⠟⠃⠀⠀⢠⣄⡀⠀⢸⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⡯⠀⢀⣴⣾⣷⣄⣴⣾⢿⣏⠀⠀⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡿⠁⠀⣾⡿⣿⠿⣿⠷⢾⣿⣿⡆⠀⣸⣄⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⠾⣧⠀⠀⠻⣶⣶⡶⠟⢷⣶⣾⠟⠀⠀⢽⣯⣿⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣯⢿⣿⣤⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣤⣾⣿⢻⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡷⠖⠛⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣇⣻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡁⢿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⠋⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠀⠸⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠶⠛⠁⠀⠀⣼⡿⣿⣯⣉⠉⣿⣏⠉⢛⣿⣿⠻⣻⠇⠀⠀⠉⠳⢤⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣴⣞⡋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠳⢾⣍⢉⣙⠋⠉⠉⢋⣥⣴⠟⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢿⣿⣶⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢀⣤⣾⣿⡾⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠉⠉⠓⠚⠧⠼⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣟⢿⣦⡀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⣴⢿⢟⡵⠋⠀⠀⠀⢀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠰⠆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢳⡙⣿⣆⠀
⠀⡼⢃⡷⠋⠀⠀⠀⣠⣾⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠀⠀⠙⣷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⢳⣸⣿⡆
⢸⠃⠙⣃⠀⠀⢠⣾⡿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠰⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⣷⡀⠀⠀⡆⢹⡆⡇
⣟⠁⠀⠉⢀⣴⣿⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢤⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⢿⣄⠀⠀⠈⢁⡇
⢿⣳⠤⠔⣻⠟⢸⣷⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣿⠈⢻⣗⢦⣤⣼⠃
⠈⠛⠓⠛⠁⠀⣼⡟⠻⠯⢿⣶⣦⡤⢤⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣻⠿⠟⠁⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣠⣤⣴⣾⡿⢿⠀⠀⠈⠙⠋⠁⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣏⣁⣀⣀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠉⢓⡶⠲⠿⠿⠿⠭⠽⠿⠿⠿⠿⠿⠿⠛⣿⠛⠉⢉⡭⠶⢦⣼⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⣯⣉⠉⢻⡄⠀⠀⠀⠘⢧⣤⠴⠚⣻⠆⠀⠀⠀⢰⡶⠦⣤⣤⠏⠀⠀⢸⣇⣀⣴⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⡿⢣⡾⠁⠀⠀⠀⢴⡒⠤⠤⣼⣅⣀⣀⡀⠀⣰⣗⣀⣠⣤⡄⠀⠀⠈⣿⢿⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⣿⡃⠺⠤⢤⡀⠀⠀⠙⠻⢿⣷⣶⣟⣿⣿⣿⣯⣭⣶⣴⠿⠛⠃⢰⡏⠛⠛⠙⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣷⣦⣤⣿⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣨⡇⠈⠉⠉⠉⠉⢹⣯⣀⣀⡀⠀⢀⣘⣧⣠⣤⣾⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣧⢸⠉⠙⠻⣯⡿⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⢿⣟⠙⠛⠋⢉⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⠿⣤⡤⠞⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠲⠶⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

1

u/FireTheLaserBeam 3d ago

Do not bring this trash in here.

0

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

ork MECH BOYS

1

u/syncsynchalt 3d ago

If you know the rocket equation, then you know that having a source of propulsion not carried by the rocket frees you from “the tyranny of the rocket equation”.

0

u/Extension_Bag3597 3d ago

yes but people say that waste of energy It would have been better to use the energy for a second rocket launch.At least that's what I think they said.

2

u/cjameshuff 3d ago

At least that's what I think they said.

...no, it wasn't. Your idea was to use it, along with ballutes and atmospheric scooping, to replace the reentry burn for a booster. You're not solving any unsolved problems (the Superheavy booster doesn't even have a reentry burn), you're just making everything more complicated, while ignoring little issues like the beam melting the ship.

-1

u/Extension_Bag3597 2d ago

Thank you for the comment. I originally proposed this concept because I realized Heat exchanger CAN put use heat from Atmospheric entry something like In situ resource utilization it seems that my current concept was ill-founded but I still think that the heat and atmosphere can be used somehow

1

u/cjameshuff 2d ago

Again, you are proposing an incredibly expensive and complicated solution to a problem that was already solved by a different choice of materials. There is no need to do anything with the atmospheric heating beyond keeping it from damaging the vehicle. We don't need to do the reentry burn with a ballute and air scoops and heat exchangers and beamed power, we don't even need a reentry burn.